MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7092367076 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.8096764

Impact of thyroid dysfunction on clinical outcome in head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· other· W7092367076 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typeother
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Analysis with R
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisThyroid dysfunctionSystematic reviewConfidence intervalStudy heterogeneityHazard ratioThyroidCohort studyCohortMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The influence of thyroid dysfunction on the clinical outcomes of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients remains an area of ongoing investigation, with previous studies yielding variable results. Treatments for HNC, particularly radiotherapy, frequently impact thyroid function. This meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the association between thyroid status (dysfunction vs. euthyroid) and survival outcomes in HNC patients. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase and Scopus were searched (January 2000-October 2024) for studies comparing survival outcomes (primarily Overall Survival) in adult HNC patients with thyroid dysfunction versus euthyroid patients. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted relevant data. The risk of bias for included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool for randomized controlled trials. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing survival were pooled using both fixed-effect (common-effect) and random-effects (REML) models. Heterogeneity across studies was assessed using the I² statistic and Cochran’s Q test. Statistical analyses were performed using R with the meta package. Results Six studies met the inclusion criteria for systematic review. Four of these studies, encompassing 671 participants, reported sufficient data (Hazard Ratios for Overall Survival) for meta-analysis. The fixed-effect model yielded a pooled HR of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.98, 1.00; p = 0.0013). However, significant heterogeneity was observed (I² = 81.5%, p = 0.0010). Consequently, the random-effects model, deemed more appropriate, yielded a pooled HR of 1.45 (95% CI: 0.66, 3.19; p = 0.3601), indicating no statistically significant association between thyroid status and overall survival in HNC patients. The estimated between-study variance (τ²) was 0.53. Conclusion This meta-analysis revealed substantial heterogeneity among studies investigating the impact of thyroid status on HNC survival. When accounting for this heterogeneity using a random-effects model, no significant association was found. The findings highlight the need for further research with larger sample sizes, standardized definitions of thyroid dysfunction, consistent reporting of adjusted effect estimates, and exploration of heterogeneity sources. Trial registration CRD42024535167.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1800.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.166
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicData Analysis with RFrench-language works237,207